Recommended Posts

Mid Am is supposed to issue something for all levels of hockey and try outs. I hope we get to a point where this will still matter soon. Every day you hear something where the amount of time gets longer. Now we are into summer, with school districts seeming to start to gear up for closing for the rest of the year. Maybe the next time I invite my kid out to skate with me and I warn him it might be the last for a while, he will listen and join me. Keep healthy, everyone,

Can someone explain to me (without citing the rule in the rule book) how the MidAm district has any authority over any small, non-profit business, to dictate when or how said business conducts its business? As long as it doesn’t violate criminal laws (which they purportedly have supported and protected people doing for a very long time) what legal right do they have to tell anyone who the business can be done? I can see where they would make a gentleman’s agreement with the member clubs to wait until after a certain date to hold tryouts, but to mandate anything seems to be a violation of certain business laws.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Can someone explain to me (without citing the rule in the rule book) how the MidAm district has any authority over any small, non-profit business, to dictate when or how said business conducts its business? As long as it doesn’t violate criminal laws (which they purportedly have supported and protected people doing for a very long time) what legal right do they have to tell anyone who the business can be done? I can see where they would make a gentleman’s agreement with the member clubs to wait until after a certain date to hold tryouts, but to mandate anything seems to be a violation of certain business laws.

Not sure about midam, but with USA Hockey, USA LaCrosse, any of those types of governing bodies... it could have something to do with the organizations buying insurance through them, and the coverage/liabilities involved. Just a guess.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Not sure about midam, but with USA Hockey, USA LaCrosse, any of those types of governing bodies... it could have something to do with the organizations buying insurance through them, and the coverage/liabilities involved. Just a guess.

Any insurance provided through USA hockey registration is a means of limiting liability to USA hockey. The participant coverage almost always reverts to the individuals personal insurance policy. In short, the registration fees keep increasing because the governing body continues to increase their potential liability as they monopolize the sport so it costs more to insure them. Any other governing body provides a much cheaper registration fee. They also provide much more protection to the members and are much more transparent. They aren’t wrong for protecting their interests but they are wrong for misleading the members into believing they have authority over their decisions regarding the management of their businesses or their members. Again, they are run by lawyers that have created an ambiguous set of rules that allows them deniability. Eventually they will be cut down to size but in the meantime they continue to profit off of the membership. Either way, no organizations will do anything but comply. So to answer the ultimate questions, expect tryouts to be very limited and rosters put together the way they are anyway, off the ice. Tryouts are nothing more than a fund raiser anymore. There are many organizations over the years that have had half their eventual roster skate during evaluations. All this crisis has done is make it harder to meet or exceed budget. Sorry @Paul Baxter, this is reality. Your original question was well intended but misguided. The government mandates will shed a light on this corrupt process in my opinion. Hopefully it forces some reform

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

You just can't have tryouts, or any other events, in the face of a set of best practices prepared by the governing body. This is for both liability and optics reasons. Nobody will hold tryouts if USA Hockey tells us not to.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

You just can't have tryouts, or any other events, in the face of a set of best practices prepared by the governing body. This is for both liability and optics reasons. Nobody will hold tryouts if USA Hockey tells us not to.

I agree. Nobody should be having tryouts. But it has nothing to do with any perceived authority the governing body has to tell anyone they should or should not. The state and federal government is deciding what is acceptable and what is not. But here’s an example of what I’m talking about- say the CDC has given an all clear on July 1. USA hockey sets a date of August 1 For commencement of tryouts. Local rinks will open ASAP in order to begin making money again whether USA hockey says so or not. So if the rink is going to hold the clubs to their contracts, why would anybody not have evaluations, set a roster, and start practicing ASAP? If your answer is because USA hockey said so, you’re wrong. They have no legal authority to keep any organization from conducting business. That includes forming rosters and collecting fees in order to pay ice contracts. Simply doing things because USA hockey says so is irresponsible

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I agree. Nobody should be having tryouts. But it has nothing to do with any perceived authority the governing body has to tell anyone they should or should not. The state and federal government is deciding what is acceptable and what is not. But here’s an example of what I’m talking about- say the CDC has given an all clear on July 1. USA hockey sets a date of August 1 For commencement of tryouts. Local rinks will open ASAP in order to begin making money again whether USA hockey says so or not. So if the rink is going to hold the clubs to their contracts, why would anybody not have evaluations, set a roster, and start practicing ASAP? If your answer is because USA hockey said so, you’re wrong. They have no legal authority to keep any organization from conducting business. That includes forming rosters and collecting fees in order to pay ice contracts. Simply doing things because USA hockey says so is irresponsible

Obviously I don't agree with all of this, but the final truth is that we will see what happens. It's easy for any of us - myself included - to make predictions we will ultimately not be held up to scrutiny for.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I'd say as the only one calling for reform on the message board, you are alone in your principle. So let's have it - what's the top 3 things you would do to eliminate corruption?

Definitely not alone in my principles unless you’re referring to this message board. As I’ve stated on a number of occasions, the lack of understanding of the majority of the posters in this board is frightening to me but exactly what the people in charge love to see. At any rate, here’s a start to answer your question-

1. have an independent audit of the affiliate finances. The national office has done a wise thing by making their main budget somewhat visible. But the affiliates are questionable at best. Lots of federal and state money is also tied up in these budgets.

2. have state and local liaisons work with federal liaisons to monitor and report on the dealings of the boards and their officials. To date they have nobody to answer to and are separate entities from the governments they represent. Millions of dollars pass through the hands of unqualified and unchecked individuals in the name of non-profit organizations. This is your money. They count on all of you just doing what you need to do to keep your kid happy.

3. Have federal money start going to organizations like the Safesport foundation also that local organizations, affiliates and national governing bodies can no longer manipulate the doctrine and use it to protect their interests. A unified and objective structure is needed.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Obviously I don't agree with all of this, but the final truth is that we will see what happens. It's easy for any of us - myself included - to make predictions we will ultimately not be held up to scrutiny for.

I’m not sure I understand. You’re saying the government (State and federal) isn’t deciding the processes regarding COVRID? You think USA hockey makes these decisions on their own?

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I’m not sure I understand. You’re saying the government (State and federal) isn’t deciding the processes regarding COVRID? You think USA hockey makes these decisions on their own?

Perhaps I was unclear, if you sincerely thought that first sentence was what I meant. Those two sentences are not mutually exclusive. From a regulatory standpoint, the government is making at large decisions about businesses being closed and gatherings being restricted.

At the same time, I do think that, like virtually all companies and organizations in the US, USA Hockey is setting their own official policies, in addition to those of the Federal and State authorities. In general, those policies are probably based upon, or actually nothing more than references to, government policies. I am entirely unsure what would happen if, for some reason, the government said it was OK to resume normal living and USA Hockey still wanted people to hold off on hockey operations. It's not clear to me what effect a USA Hockey policy would have in this case. Since the organizations rely upon USA Hockey for collective insurance, they may have more influence on organized hockey operations than expected. The assertion made above that the purpose of insurance provided by USA Hockey is to protect USA Hockey is only partially true; the insurance makes it much less expensive (and, perhaps in some cases, is the only thing that makes it possible) for local organizations to have insurance to protect the local organizations, and to protect the rinks. Without the insurance provided by USA Hockey, it's likely that many organizations would not be able to afford insurance in order to have operations.

This is all academic, anyway, because I strongly doubt that USA Hockey would adopt a policy that was at odds with a government policy. In the case of complying with a government policy, that is its own built-in defense in a court room (which could be either weak or strong, depending upon the issue and the case, and the locality).

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Perhaps I was unclear, if you sincerely thought that first sentence was what I meant. Those two sentences are not mutually exclusive. From a regulatory standpoint, the government is making at large decisions about businesses being closed and gatherings being restricted.

At the same time, I do think that, like virtually all companies and organizations in the US, USA Hockey is setting their own official policies, in addition to those of the Federal and State authorities. In general, those policies are probably based upon, or actually nothing more than references to, government policies. I am entirely unsure what would happen if, for some reason, the government said it was OK to resume normal living and USA Hockey still wanted people to hold off on hockey operations. It's not clear to me what effect a USA Hockey policy would have in this case. Since the organizations rely upon USA Hockey for collective insurance, they may have more influence on organized hockey operations than expected. The assertion made above that the purpose of insurance provided by USA Hockey is to protect USA Hockey is only partially true; the insurance makes it much less expensive (and, perhaps in some cases, is the only thing that makes it possible) for local organizations to have insurance to protect the local organizations, and to protect the rinks. Without the insurance provided by USA Hockey, it's likely that many organizations would not be able to afford insurance in order to have operations.

This is all academic, anyway, because I strongly doubt that USA Hockey would adopt a policy that was at odds with a government policy. In the case of complying with a government policy, that is its own built-in defense in a court room (which could be either weak or strong, depending upon the issue and the case, and the locality).

Thanks for clarifying. I do have to say that after the clarification in your first paragraph, the rest seems to be nothing more than filibustering. Couple of questions (and let’s assume that everyone realizes that unqualified and uncertified individuals are the ones that hold almost all pertinent decision making positions within the sport at the local and affiliate level)-

are you claiming that all hockey organizations that field teams hold personal injury or liability insurance under the umbrella of a greater policy held by USA hockey?

are you claiming that said insurance is granted to and covers all the unqualified individuals that maybe conducting the business of non-profits under the larger umbrella?

are you claiming that ice rinks do not carry their own liability insurance and rely on the insurance provided by USA hockey to cover their liability?

2. are you saying state/local should monitor federal or other way around? I could see a need for more accountability at the local level.

3. given the current payment structure, it seems federal can't fund anything as they are already funded by local resources. And in what way are they not already providing a unified objective structure?

2. are you saying state/local should monitor federal or other way around? I could see a need for more accountability at the local level.

3. given the current payment structure, it seems federal can't fund anything as they are already funded by local resources. And in what way are they not already providing a unified objective structure?

1. Yes that’s a great audit. Although the opinion of the firm are very subjective and wouldn’t hold up in civil court when asked to explain the huge sub contractor budget with virtually zero explanation as to what that is. Among other vague expenditures. But yes this isn’t exclusive to your area.

2. there needs to be transparency across the board at all levels. All that’s fine is what is required by law. This in no way eliminates the ability of someone to violate rights or break laws.

3. I think you need to study the USA hockey bylaws and see how they match up with federal laws as well as the standards of federal programs they’re exploiting and abusing. Then you’ll have a better understanding of what I’m talking about.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The entire line item for all contractors is $182k. Guessing that covers camp instructors, tournament officials, EMTs, etc. So its unlikely anyone is getting rich or wealthy from Mid-Am. And since it's a 501c3, any member should be able to request a look at the books and ask the questions you're asking. Why not get with your local association membership, show up at the annual meeting, and ask your questions then?

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The entire line item for all contractors is $182k. Guessing that covers camp instructors, tournament officials, EMTs, etc. So its unlikely anyone is getting rich or wealthy from Mid-Am. And since it's a 501c3, any member should be able to request a look at the books and ask the questions you're asking. Why not get with your local association membership, show up at the annual meeting, and ask your questions then?

Well as far as myself I’ve fought my battles. Your district has many to go from what I hear. I know exactly what the rights of the members are and I appreciate you getting it out there for folks to see. I would encourage as many as possible to start questioning the leadership in district. From what I hear, WPA has been oppressed by the district and many that have attempted to run for positions have been blackballed.
As far as the budget, not all benefits are included in a budget. Financial or otherwise.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Well before we dive into more allegations, could you point out some fraud in the Mid-Am contractor line item expense, or any other Mid-Am expense? Maybe a concerned member could ask about it at the next meeting.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

From what I hear, WPA has been oppressed by the district and many that have attempted to run for positions have been blackballed.

I agree with the statement above.

I have tried before to get information on how to apply to be the midam registrar for WPA but heard back **crickets**.

I have no idea who the people are that run the midam district but it certainly seems to be a closed club. Nobody's bio is posted and I have no idea what the qualifications are to even hold position at MA.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Well before we dive into more allegations, could you point out some fraud in the Mid-Am contractor line item expense, or any other Mid-Am expense? Maybe a concerned member could ask about it at the next meeting.

Nice try Jack! Any claims I’m privy to anywhere have or will be made in court with an attorney’s blessing. If any concerned members would like to ask questions they’re big boys and girls and can do their homework themselves which is not very intensive. Start with asking for a detail of who the contractors were and if any of them had any conflicts of interest. In any district, it usually doesnt take much deeper digging than that. Just curious why you’re so worried about it? If everyone here doesn’t share my beliefs, then what difference does it make? Is it affecting you somehow?

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

True but I believe he was referring to how one goes about being nominated for appointment. And the Bylaws are loosely followed at all levels of USA hockey. Vanbiesbrouck anyone? He didn’t violate any codes of conduct did he?

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Oh no you don't. You're the one alleging corruption and crying foul every day on this forum. So we're all ears, King.

Who’s we, first of all? And it might help if you were all eyes because you could read the suggestions I’ve made to find this information. If you’re suggesting some kind of “no pic it’s fake” type of scenario, I could care less what you as an individual thinks. But I’ll keep giving relevant suggestions and opinions and eventually, enough people will get it and things will change. And I’m far from the only one that alleges corruption. I just see it as a cultural issue that is the impetus for all the problems this sport has. Especially in your area. I have yet to be proven wrong on that front. Again, I’m curious why you’re so curious to try and get me to give some specific information? Got yourself into some trouble or something? Or is it close to home?